<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (1) TMI 702 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353966</link>
    <description>Valuation of clearances was examined in the context of disputed buyer relationship and the availability of independent sales. The text states that the buyers were alleged to be related or interconnected persons, but the record also indicated sales to unrelated parties, requiring fresh examination before rejecting invoice value. It further notes that transaction value may remain relevant where comparable non-related sales exist, and that cost construction need not be applied mechanically without reviewing the factual matrix and amended valuation rules. The impugned valuation order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision, with liberty to the assessee to produce additional evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2018 09:24:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=504582" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 702 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353966</link>
      <description>Valuation of clearances was examined in the context of disputed buyer relationship and the availability of independent sales. The text states that the buyers were alleged to be related or interconnected persons, but the record also indicated sales to unrelated parties, requiring fresh examination before rejecting invoice value. It further notes that transaction value may remain relevant where comparable non-related sales exist, and that cost construction need not be applied mechanically without reviewing the factual matrix and amended valuation rules. The impugned valuation order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision, with liberty to the assessee to produce additional evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353966</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>